Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took to Twitter to take a jab at President Donald Trump after a San Francisco appeals court of three judges unanimously ruled to not reinstate his controversial travel ban.
The former Democratic nominee tweeted "3-0," citing the unanimous call made by the judges.
President Trump also took to Twitter to express his outrage at the decision.
"SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!" Trump tweeted in all caps.
Popular VideoThis young teenage singer was shocked when Keith Urban invited her on stage at his concert. A few moments later, he made her wildest dreams come true.
While the president seems intent on appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, his nominee to the nation's highest court, Neil Gorsuch, will not be confirmed in time to take part in the ruling.
During an interview with reporters in the West Wing of the White House, Trump called the ruling by the San Francisco appeals court judges a "political decision."
Popular VideoThis young teenage singer was shocked when Keith Urban invited her on stage at his concert. A few moments later, he made her wildest dreams come true:
"It’s a very very serious situation so we look forward to seeing them in court," Trump said, according to NBC reporter Bradd Jaddy.
Trump also said the ruling did not undermine his presidency.
"No this is just a decision that came down but we're going to win the case," Trump added.
The three judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that their decision was made because the government presented no evidence to explain the urgency of the executive order or why it needed to take effect immediately.
"On the one hand, the public has a powerful interest in national security and in the ability of an elected president to enact policies," the court said. "And on the other, the public also has an interest in free flow of travel, in avoiding separation of families, and in freedom from discrimination."
The judges also rejected the Trump administration's claim they did not have the authority to review the president's order.
"There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy," the court added.